[Numpy-discussion] Should I use pip install numpy in linux?

[Matthew Brett]

Hi,

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Steve Waterbury
<waterbug at pangalactic.us> wrote:
> On 01/15/2016 04:08 PM, Benjamin Root wrote:
>>
>> So, again, I love conda for what it can do when it works well. I only
>> take exception to the notion that it can address *all* problems, because
>> there are some problems that it just simply isn't properly situated for.
>
>
> Actually, I would say you didn't mention any ... ;)  The issue is
> not that it "isn't properly situated for" (whatever that means)
> the problems you describe, but that -- in the case you mention,
> for example -- no one has conda-packaged those solutions yet.
>
> FWIW, our sysadmins and I use conda for django / apache / mod_wsgi
> sites and we are very happy with it.  IMO, compiling mod_wsgi in
> the conda environment and keeping it up is trivial compared to the
> awkwardnesses introduced by using pip/virtualenv in those cases.
>
> We also use conda for sites with nginx and the conda-packaged
> uwsgi, which works great and even permits the use of a separate
> env (with, if necessary, different versions of django, etc.)
> for each application.  No need to set up an entire VM for each app!
> *My* sysadmins love conda -- as soon as they saw how much better
> than pip/virtualenv it was, they have never looked back.
>
> IMO, conda is by *far* the best packaging solution the python
> community has ever seen (and I have been using python for more
> than 20 years).

Yes, I think everyone would agree that, until recently, Python
packaging was in a mess.

> I too have been stunned by some of the resistance
> to conda that one sometimes sees in the python packaging world.

You can correct me if you see evidence to the contrary, but I think
all of the argument is that it is desirable that pip should work as
well.

> I've had a systems package maintainer tell me "it solves a
> different problem [than pip]" ... hmmm ... I would say it
> solves the same problem *and more*, *better*.

I know what you mean, but I suppose the person you were talking to may
have been thinking that many of us already have Python distributions
that we are using, and for those, we want to use pip.

> I attribute
> some of the conda-ignoring to "NIH" and, to some extent,
> possibly defensiveness (I would be defensive too if I had been
> working on pip as long as they had when conda came along ;).

I must say, I don't personally recognize those reasons.  For example,
I hadn't worked on pip at all before conda came along.

Best,

Matthew